1 Kyle E. Lomazow 

2 FAA Office of Regional Counsel 

3 1601 Lind Ave., SW 

RECEIVED 

NOV- 5 2012 

4 Renton, Washington 98057 

5 Telephone: 425/227-1847 

6 Facsimile: 425/227-1007 

7 

HEARING DOCKET 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

17 In the Matter of 

18 FAA DOCKET NUMBER 2011NM30039 

19 Mountain Aviation DMS No. FAA-2012-0875 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

REBUTTAL TO RESPONDENT'S 

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT'S MOTION 

FOR DECISION 

IDDGE RICHARD C. GOODWIN 

2 8 TO: The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin: 

29 

30 

31 

32 

33 

34. 

·In Respondent's Answer to Complainant's Motion for Decision, Respondent argues 

that the "all checks" designation in the designation of check airman letter received from 

Principle Operations Inspector (POI) AI Hankins (Exhibit 1) somehow had the magical 

effect of transforming check airman Oren Taft into an aircrew designated examiner (ADE). 

However, Respondent has never employed an ADE and had absolutely no reason to believe 

that they did. As indicated in Complainant's Motion for Decision, Respondent has not and 

will not be able to offer any proof that any of their check airmen were designated as aircrew 

designated examiners because they never were and. Respondent has no evidence even 

remotely suggesting otherwise. Respondent knows they never employed an ADE and that is 

why the only· "evidence" they can offer is a letter from the FAA which refers to an "all 

checks" and an affidavit from Respondent's Chief Pilot indicating he "believed" the 

referenct? to an "all checks" conferred ADE status upon their check airmen. This is a 

completely meritless argument and is comparing apples to oranges. 

As indicated by the affidavit of Dennis Ham (exhibit 3 ), an "all checks" designation 

has nothing to do with an ADE. '~All Checks" refers to the type of checks that check airmen 

35 

36 

37 

38 

39 

40 

41 

42 

43 

44 

45 

46 

47 

48 

49 

50 

51· 

52 

53 

Motion for Decision 

Mountain Aviation- FAA DOCKET NUMBER 

2011NM30039 

KYLE E. LOMAZOW, FAA ATTORNEY 

TEL: (425) 227-1847; FAX: (425) 227-1007 

DMS No. FAA-2012-0875 

Page 1 of3 

1 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

.13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23· 

24 

25 

26 

27 

are qualified to provide. These three checks include competency checks, instrument 

proficiency checks and line checks. Those check airmen who are qualified to conduct all the 

above-mentioned checks rather than just one or two c;rre given a letter citing "check airmanall checks." 

An Aircrew designated examiner, on the other hand, provides testing and services which 

results 14 C.F .R. Part 61 certification. That has nothin to do with an "all checks" as 

relating to check airmen. Instead of just assuming this letter from their POI conferred ADE 

status upon Respondent's check airmen, Respondent could have and should have taken 

extra steps to inquire as to the status of their check airmen and what they could and could 

notdo. · 

In summary, Respondent employed . a flight check airman who did not receive the 

appropriate competency/proficiency exam from either an FAA inspector or aircrew 

designated examiner under FAR§ 135.339(a)(2). Instead of owning up to this mistake and 

rectifying it,_ Respondent has instead come up with an argument that is a complete 

smokescreen. If Respondent truly did not understand what an "all checks" referred to after 

being in business for almost twenty years then that is a competency issue on their part and 

not an excuse to violate the F ARS, which they clearly did in this case. 

For those reasons Complaint's Motion for Decision should be granted and a hearing should 

be held on sanction only. 

28 DATED this 30th of October 2012 

29 

30 

31 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

38 

39 

40 

41 

42 

43 

44 

45 

46 

47 

48 

49 

50 

51 

52 

53 

Kyle E. Lomazow 

FAA Attorney 

Motion for Decision 

Mountain Aviation.- FAA DOCKET NUMBER 

2011NM30039 

DMS No. FAA-2012-0875 

Page 2 of3 

KYLE E. LOMAZOW, F AAATTORNEY 

TEL: (425) 227-1847; FAX: (425) 227~1007 

2 
1 

2 

3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

4 

5 

6 I hereby certify that the foregoing Motion for Decision has been served via facsimile and 

7 Certified Mail -Return Receipt Requested this date, to the following: 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

49 

30 

onora e c ar . oo wm 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

FAX: (202) 366-7536 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2W1 000 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence A venue SW 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

FAX: (202) 493-5020 

KentS. Jackson, Esq. 

Attorney for Respondent 

Jackson & Wade, LLC 

2168 Midland Drive 

Shawnee, KS 66218 

TEL: (913) 338-1700 

FAX: (612) 977-8650 

31 Dated this 30th, day of October, 2012. 

ANA STEPfffiNON . 

Office of Regional Counsel (ANM-7) · 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1601 LindAve. SW · Renton, WA 98057 

(425) 227-2164 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

38 

39 

40 

41 

42 

43 

44 

45 

46 

47 

48 

49 

50 

51 

52 

53 

Motion for Decision. 

Mountain Aviation - FAA DOCKET NUMBER 

2011NM30039 

KYLE E. LOMAZOW, FAA ATTORNEY 

TEL: (425) 227-1847; FAX: (425) 227-1007 

DMS No:FAA-2012-0875 

Page 3 of3 

3 
1 Kyle Lomazow 

2 FAA Office of Regional Counsel 

3 1601 Lind Ave. SW 

RECEIVED 

NOV- 5 2012 

4 Renton, Washington 98057 

5 Telephone: 425/227-1847 

6 Facsimile: 425/227-1007 HEARING DOCKET 

7 

8 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ----<931----------------------FE~DER*t7t~~~~~----------------------

lo OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

11 

12 

13 MICHAEL P. HUERTA, Acting 

14. Administrator, Federal Aviation 

15 Administration, 

16 

17 COMPLAINANT, 

18 

19 vs. 

20 

21 MountainAviation, 

22 

23 RESPONDENT 

24 

25 

26 

27 Dennis Ham hereby attests as follows: 

28 

DMS. No. FAA-2012-0875 

. Judge Richard C. Goodwin 

DECLARATION OF DENNIS HARM IN 

SUPPORT OF COMPLAINANT'S 

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

29 

30 

31 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

38 

39 

40 

41 

42 

43 

44 

45 

46 

47 

48 

49 

50 

51 

52 

53 

1. I am an Aviation Safety Inspector, Air Carrier Operations with the Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA). I have over 20 years experience overseeing 

check airmen programs and over 15 years overseeing Aircrew Program Designees. 

Prior to employment with the FAA, I served as a check airman and chief pilot for 

a 14 CFR 135 commuter air carrier for 6 years. 

2. 

3. 

Check Airmen are required by 14 CFR 135.323. Check airmen approved via 

letter by the overseeing Principal Operation Inspector (POI) and serve at the 

pleasure of the POI normally with no specific expiration date. Check airmen 

qualification and training is specified in 14 CFR 135.337 and 135.339. 

Check airmen are limited to specific types of checks. Under 14 CFR 135, these 

include competency checks, instrument proficiency checks and line checks. 

Those check airmen authorized to conduct all these checks are issued a letter 

citing "check airman- all checks". Check Airman program guidance is provided 

in FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 20. 

Aircrew Program Designees (APD) are representatives of the Administrator under 

14 CFR 183. They provided testing and checking services which results in 14 

CFR 61 airman certification. An APD functions under a Memorandum of 

Understanding between the employing air carrier and the FAA. The candidate 

APD makes a formal application on FAA Form 8710-6. After meeting eligibility, 

qualification, training and observation criteria, they are recommended by an 

1 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

4. 

overseeing FAA Aircrew Program Manager and designated by a POI and office 

manager. Designation is formally made on FAA Forms 8000-5 and 8430-:9 and a 

Letter of Authorization and is valid for a 12 month period. APD program 

guidance is provided in FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 13, Chapter 1. 

I have reviewed the Affidavit of Gary Emmerson, dated October 24, 2012, 

paragraph 3. Given his role and tenure as Chief Pilot, I find it lacks credibility. 

He should be fully aware of the limitations of check airmen, if not an APD. 

10 

11 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my 

12 recollection and belief. 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

38 

39 

40 

41 

42 

43 

44 

45 

46 

47 

48 

49 

50 

51 

52 

53 

Dated: O? r 12 c:fA:J.kw- , 2012. 

·~~ 

2 
U.S. Deportment 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

September 5, 2006 

Mr. Richy Bje!jevig 

Mountain Aviation, Inc. 

9646 Jeffco Airport Ave, 

Broomfield, CO. 80021 

Dear Mr. Bjeljevig: 

Denver Flight Standards District Office 

26805 E:ast 68th Avenue .• Sufte 200 

Denver, Colorado 80249 

. 303-342-1144, Fax: 303-342-1176 

1-800-847-38 

· SUBJECT: t?esfgnation of Check Airman 

·This certifies that Rodney Getty, FAA Certificate number 1965314, is approved as check 

airman. This check airman is approved to conduct checks in .BE-90 BE-200 and CE-500 aircraft 

for employees of Mountain Aviation. 

This approval is applicable for the following checking functions: 

Checking Function: Effective date: 

Check Pilot - All Checks February 12, 2002 

Please retain a copy of this fetter in the airman's individual flight training records. 

Sincerely, 

AI Hankins 

Principal Operations Inspector 
{. 

j 

)t' 

;. 

:: 

Oct 25 2012 15;43 JETLAW. 9133381755 p. 15 

·.:· 

·.·: 

· .. ,• 

., '·.:·:·' 

,.: -~· . : ' •• ·!.. 

·•·. .. ~- -· .. :~ :_: •·. 

;:,.· 

.~: 

. . ·:··· 

.· .. ·. 

f . 

. ,. 

·. : . . . : ~ ·. t :,."c-·: .·.,·· 

. ;-~·-.:·· ·.. __ ..... ·>: ~- ~' '. '•, -~~-·-: 

._, .. :. · .. · · .. . ·.: .. ..:-.· . .>:· .. ..... :· .. -:·a·-~_-::.: ... ~:{·:~_-::-_,_\:.·::~. , ;··-- .. ·. . ..... .,. '_,.·:·,;·:,;" .. 

·. ~~ ·,1{. ·:.·:~tt::~iNM@~··. :;;. ;'_· ·,J·:~; 

.· .·:: .. ~:~ .. · ~"ti:n<~~~-~· .. ::i·t· . ¥Qt!NT~A'WI,Wll'f,~Jill!: \ , ,· .. . .. ) <, : , ' .' >' ' ~!:l!;·~', .. · 

·:·. ;•, 

· .. · 

.. •' 

., 

·:·. > 

.· .. .... · .... ·: 

... . . '~ ·' . ~: ' '.: : .. •' 
Oct 25 2012 15:44 JETLAIJ 

··: .· ': .· '' . 

9133381755 p. 16 

· •. •' . . ',; :· ·: • •'. 1:· t. :-:::_.._ . : .......... · ......... .. : 

> : . .. ;: _:.~ ... ~::·:··.: -~ .. ~ ··.··;. --::~·\.~~-

• • •• '.·~· • .:. ,: •• •• ·: ... ·t,' :: : • :· : ••• : • • '• • • • ': .' •• 

• : •, ;! •· 

. .. .. . . '·'\, ·./<·<~-~::··· ·.. .;:··.: ·,\ .:·· :·:.· . 

. . 4. · · · ~:¥.~~~~;.i~~6~$::~~ir : ... ·;'.''· · ·;: :?. ;:.:. ·: :<:~y,·]he 14 oF. · §• · · · ·.: .. ;· · '::' :· .. ·: ...... ·:' .. ::~;· .. :·~.~.:.:.· .. :.,.f·:.:.;~~:.··~.·.).,: ', ... :::t~:s.·.l9,~~:.U'$;2!).1:~d; ~:::.:;;<h~~ .>: :··M..f~;~;i/::'. ' . 

-+------"-. -. --'-'--:---<,-----'-:·;....,:..:.f!!~:t;w~¥.1<~~f~•~~;L,M¥,~~~· . .·iJ~~"!':':.~·~7·:~~··.::""'" ........... ·':"':~/"""": ... .....;· :.:~: i:-i-:.:.:i:- .. /""":;.._:. ---

~,~~~~: ' ' ,: .· .. ·.:·.:·.·.;·:···········'·;·,··.;···:'~:.·.:.:, •• 

:." 

;· 

; 

L 

) 

; 

-~. 

!' 

; 

: .. 

~ . 

..• · 

·.· .. 

. s.. .. ... · .... ·" . .. .. ... ,' 

·· ,.·.:M~a~:~on.r.m· ~~,~ 

: :· .. :.{$·~.~:$~{~~)::tbi~.~~~ :; 

:··· · .

.·: 

. . .. 

·' 

. · .. 

.. .. : . : ... '; ... . '· ..... •,. ;: . ·.·· · ... : .·. t·.:··.. : ·.· . 

. ,' ... 

f· . ·. ... .·.· .· .·' . ~· :. . . . . '!. 

. •' 

: ... ~· : ... . ~: ... . . . . ~ .. ... ~. 

. . . ', \ ..... 

: .. ·:·. 

.. ·. 

. •' 

''' 

·: ~ : ... 

. ~ . : . . . 

. .'·· ·: 

..... ·· . ''.: 

.... · ..... ·:··: __ :'-::. :'·. 

.': .• :·.· ... · ·.· 

.. ;=:. . ....... ·:··· . '· 

,• . · .

. . . .. ~. : . 

. . · .·. ·.· .. 

. ::··· . 

::·t 

,•i ••• 

. ... ', . ·:·· .. 

·" 00 oh 

. :'', ... · .. 

. ,•. 

.·.:·.· 

. .. ~:· .. -~ 

. :: :~. i" . . ~. . 

.. .. : ,,_,.:· .. 

. ·:·. ,·· .. ·· ..... . .. ' . :·'. ::_~:.: ... :>·:.;.~---~·: :~··.·· .~;·:· .. \·: ::/:: ~-:;·: . ..... :'.· .····.:· 

.. : :·· . . .':::·\ ... ··::., ! 

. · · .. . .. · .. 

·.·: .. .:: .... ·.· .·.· . 

';': · . . . . :: .. :_ ... }:~· . 

. .. ·· :-:·: . ., .... ,. ,• ... • ,' .·,, e' ,•,,. 

•'. :: .·• :}: ~·, ·:···'::' .. 

i ·..•. : •. ' j. <;< ;~1''' ·. :·· .. .• ·.· ... .. 

. ·>-: ::;.·:/ :·:·)·.'·. :.::.:::':/{~<(:':/:{·; !. 

:··= ... ··'. ~ . : . : -~·: ... · ... 

.. > ..... ···: 

.. :~.::.:·:: .. : 
1 Kyle Lomazow 

2 FAA Office of· Regional Counsel 

3 1601 Lind Ave. SW 

4 Renton, Washington 98057 

5 Telephone: 425/227-184 7 

6 Facsimile: 425/227-1007 

7 

s UNITED STATES OF AME;RICA 

9 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

J.O OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

u 

12 

13 MICHAEL P. HUERTA, Acting 

14 Administrator, Federal Aviation 

15. Administration, 

16 DMS. No. FAA-2012-0875 

17 COMPLAINANT, 

18 . Judge Richard C. Goodwin 

19 vs. 

20 

21 Mountain Aviation, 

DECLARATION OF DENNIS IIARMlN 

SUPPORT OF COMPLAINANT'S 

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 22 

23 RESPONDENT 

24 

25 

26 

21 Dennis Hatn hereby attests as follows: 

28 

29 

30 

31 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

38 

39 

40 

41 

42 

43 

44 

45 

46 

47 

48 

49 

50 

5J. 

52 

53 

1. 

2. 

3. 

I am an Aviation Safety Inspector, Air Carrier Operations with the Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA). r have over 20 years experience overseeing 

check airmen programs and over 15 years overseeing Aircrew Program Designees. 

Prior to employment with the FAA, I served as a check ainnan and chief pilot for 

. a 14 CFR 13 5 commuter air carrier for 6 years. 

Check Airmen are required by 14 CFR 135.323. Check airmen approved via 

letter by the overseeing Principal Operation Inspector (POI) and serve at the 

pleasure of the POI nom1ally with no specific expiration date; Check airmen 

qualification and training is specified in 14 CFR 135.337 and 135.339. 

Check airmen are limited to specific types of checks. Under 14 CFR 135, these 

include competency checks, instrument proficiency checks and line checks. 

Those check ainnen authorized to conduct all these checks are issued aJetter 

citing "check airman - all checks". Check Airman program guidance is provided 

in FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 20. 

Aircrew Program Designees (APD) are representatives of the Administrator under 

14 CFR 183. They provided testing and checking services whichresults in 14 

CFR 61 airman certification. An APD functions under a Memorandum of 

Understanding between the employing air carrier and the FAA. The candidate 

APD makes a formal application on FAA Form 8710-6. After meeting eligibility, 

qualification, training and observation criteria, they are recommended by an 
1 

2 

.3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14. 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 . 

32 

33 

34 

35. 

36 

37 

38 

39 

~~- 40 

41 

"'-~ 

42 

43 

~.44 .. 

4s. 

46 

47 

48 

49 

50 

51 

52 

53 

overseeing FAA Aircrew Program Manager and designated by a POI and office 

manager. Designation is formally made on FAA Forms 8000-5 and 8430-9 and a 

Letter of Authorization and is valid for a 12 month period. APD program 

guidance is provided in FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 13, Chapter 1. 

4. I have reviewed the Affidavit of Gary Emmerson, dated October 24,2012, 

paragrap . IV en 1s ro e an tenure as Cliief"Pilot, I fimtit-tla<:i'lc<tJrs"t"7'c'l'lre""~'d:ilt1'bi-riiitlintyr-. -------- He should be fully aware of the limitations of check airmen, if not an APD. 

I deClare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my 

recollection and belief. ·· 

Dated: d tf 0 dobv '2012. 

ASI, 

D~2:7'= Operations Specialist 

Flight Standards; ANM-240 

1601 Lind Ave SW 

Renton, W A 98057 

2